Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cooperative Agreements topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legal staff clarifies cooperative agreements, privatization and who adopts the parish comprehensive plan
Summary
St. Tammany Parish legal counsel told the charter review committee on March 27 that the parish can contract for private provision of services and enter cooperative agreements with other governments but remains constrained by the Louisiana Constitution’s prohibition on gratuitous donations of public funds.
St. Tammany Parish legal staff briefed the Home Rule Charter Review Committee on March 27 about limits and authorities in the parish charter and state law regarding cooperative agreements, privatization of services, use of outside counsel and adoption of the comprehensive plan.
Legal counsel said parish government already has the authority to contract with private firms for services such as grass cutting, drainage maintenance and other operational tasks and that cooperative agreements with other governmental entities are likewise permitted. Counsel cautioned that the Louisiana Constitution constrains the use of public funds — citing Article 7, Section 14 — so the parish cannot gratuitously donate taxpayer dollars to private entities. Counsel said that in practice contracting and competitive procurement are commonly used for privatized services and that charter language can clarify intent but cannot override constitutional limits.
Committee members asked whether the charter should be amended to explicitly reference private‑sector cooperative arrangements or privatization preferences; legal staff suggested adding a dedicated charter section on public‑private partnerships or privatization intent rather than editing the general intergovernmental cooperative agreement clause.
Counsel also addressed who adopts the parish comprehensive plan. NACo and members of the public had raised questions about the 2040 master plan process. Legal counsel said state law assigns adoption of the comprehensive plan to the planning commission; the parish council enacts, enforces and uses the plan through zoning and ordinance actions. Counsel noted the council still must consult and use the master plan when making zoning decisions.
Committee members discussed other charter language points: whether to clarify the definition of "parish" when the charter refers to actions the "parish" may take (legal staff said such wording has been used intentionally to allow administrative actions in routine intergovernmental agreements while reserving appropriation decisions for the council). Counsel offered to draft sample language on public‑private partnerships and to research whether additional charter text would be appropriate to permit contracting where lawful and to identify any services that could not be privatized because of statutory or funding restrictions.
Ending
Legal counsel’s clarifications left the committee with three practical follow‑ups: (1) staff will draft recommended language for an explicit public‑private partnership/privatization section for the committee to consider; (2) counsel confirmed the planning commission adopts the comprehensive plan under state law and the council applies it when acting on zoning matters; and (3) the clerk/PIO was assigned to update meeting notices after the committee voted to move the next meeting to March 31 at 6:00 PM.
